DIVYADIP @ DIPUBHA NARENDRABHAI BAROT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule . Learned APP Mr. J.K. Shah, waives service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) Present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking regular bail in connection with the FIR, being C.R. No.11196005200489 of 2020 registered with Chhani Police Station, Vadodara for the offences punishable under Sections 306, 506 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 40 of the Gujarat Money Lending Act .

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Khambhojla appearing on behalf of the applicant has submitted that looking to the FIR, there is no specific allegation against the applicant and it is general allegation leveled against all the accused persons. On the contrary, according to Mr. Khambhojla, the deceased had purchased one Air Conditioner in the name of the complainant on 8.10.2018 and finance of the same was taken from Finance Capital-I Limited company and the said amount was to be paid and as such, the allegations which have been leveled against the applicant are misconceived and far from truth. Apart from that, Mr. Khambholja has drawn the attention of this Court to page 10 of the application compilation, where it is stated that one co-accused named Rohan Joshi, who has been specifically named has been granted bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.7.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.9249 of 2020 and as such, on the basis of general allegations which have been leveled when the co-accused is already granted bail, on the said terms and conditions, a request is made to grant regular bail to the present applicant. Additionally, Mr. Khambholja has relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of M. Arjunan Vs. State , 2019 3 SCC 315, in which after interpretation of the provisions of Section 306 of the IPC, it has been observed that, 'the act of the accused, however, insulting the deceased by using abusive language will not, by itself, constitute the abatement of suicide. There should be evidence capable of suggesting that the accused intended to by such act to instigate the deceased to commit suicide.' As such, after referring to this decision, a request is made even in view of the principle of parity also, to grant regular bail to the present applicant since the charge-sheet has now been submitted and there is no likelihood of misuse of liberty.